Border/boundary control. Are we influenced by the ancients?

[teartracks]

Hi everyone,

During my 9, so far, years of recovery, it has been helpful at times to think of myself as a piece of real estate or a small country whose borders have been encroached upon - abused, violated, attacked.  Using this metaphor and others led to exploring how and why I so freely allowed others to advanced beyond respectful limits in their interactions with me and how I could stop it.  I also had to learn (and still am) how to respect boundaries.  I've learned a lot.  I learned that the abuse I received, starting with infancy and continuing throughout my childhood had become the underlying foundation for a life time of soft personal borders that opened the door for further abuses after leaving the family home.  Those ensuing abuses were a direct result of not having had and not having been taught that I was in charge of, indeed must work at protecting my 'self',  my body, soul and spirit and even some space beyond that called personal space.  My natural bent in adulthood was to seek out familiar behaviors in others that were congruent with the belief system I'd been taught.  Abnormal interactions (cold war tactics) and behaviors 'felt' more normal and safe.  I had a suitcase of daunting dysfunctional behaviors of my own to bring to virtually every human encounter.  In my FOO, it was a constant state of rivalry and tension between my parents and we three siblings.  The major triangle, and the one that was in place most of the time involved my mom as the powerful one at one point of the triangle, my dad at the second, and us kids at the third.  At that third point, no doubt, we kids had our own triangulation going on.  I still haven't figured that one out!  It (the cold war) all stopped just short of violent, open confrontation.   As we've discussed many times on the board, lack of  'open' is often part of the setup.

Today, I read a little  about ancient Roman law.  It made me wonder how much of our personal relationships and attitudes, even social ones are influenced by those ancient laws.  For instance, here's some wording from ancient Roman law that I found interesting:    'the right to use and abuse a thing, within the limits of the law'.  Here's another:   "sole and despotic dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in total exclusion of the right of any other individual in the universe.” This description may have been to some degree hyperbole, but accurately demonstrates the baseline conception of property in Anglo-American law".
Ingress and egress of personal boundaries came to mind.  Access and egress are more applicable terms where personal boundaries are concerned, but I think ingress might also come to bear.  I found this short excerpt on how crowd control has been studied.  I guess I was hoping to find something helpful in it to use where maintaining personal boundaries are concerned.  The most interesting part in that regard was the part in bold.  Here goes.  

Generally speaking, most existing models can be categorized into (1) fluid or particle systems, (2) matrix-based systems, and (3) emergent systems:
 
• Many have considered the analogy between fluid and particle motions (including interactions) and crowd movement. One example of fluid or particle systems is the panic simulation system built by Helbing et al. [11]. Coupling fluid dynamic and “self-driven” particle models with discrete virtual reality simulation techniques, these systems attempt to simulate and to help design evacuation strategies. Recent studies have revealed that the fluid or particle analogies of crowd are untenable. As noted by Still [8], “the laws of crowd dynamics have to include the fact that people do not follow the laws of physics; they have a choice in their direction, have no conservation of momentum and can stop and start at will.” flow, and uneven crowd density distribution. For example, herding behavior is often observed during the evacuation of a crowd.  Fluid or particle analogies also contradict with some observed crowd behaviors, such as herding behavior, multi-directional wd in a room with two exits - one exit is clogged while the other is not fully utilized [12]. However, a fluid or particle analogy would likely predict that both exits were being used efficiently. Furthermore, it is difficult for fluid or particle systems to properly model bi-directional flows (with people moving in opposite directions) in a very crowded environment.

Oh, here's something with terms that resonate with me and some of the discussions on the board.  The areas separately referred to as non-independent are territories that are disputed, are occupied, have a government in exile or have a non-negligible independence movement.  Notice that all of these come under the heading of non-independent territories.  1) Disputed.  2) Occupied.  3) Government in exile.  4) Non-negligible independence movement.  I thinking  I'd be classified as a non-negligible independence movement.  How about you?

I don't know if any of this resonates with y'all, but for whatever it's worth...

tt

PS  Sorry for the typos.  Jumpy screen.  Difficult to correct!
 

[sKePTiKal]

1) Disputed.  2) Occupied.  3) Government in exile.  4) Non-negligible independence movement. 5) Sovereign Country

OK, after letting this sit a little... and amusing myself with the particle theory option (which flat-out didn't go anywhere useful for me)... I'm back to these terms.

I'm gonna need some clarification, tt. Can you match all these up with an example involving boundaries? Can we rephrase "non-negligible" to "significant" independence movement? The double negative is confusing. I'm including Guest's sovereign country... provisionally. These days, "sovereign" countries aren't necessarily what I'd call independent, cohesive entities, with enough commonality among consitituents to have a cohesive "identity". Anyway, I'm thinking if we can match these terms to specific situations... then the concept might go somewhere very, very interesting.

You mentioned Roman law... I just read an interesting editorial re: the gulf oil spill that proposed an unusual perspective to view all the circumstances surrounding it from. (Dangling participles aside; maybe Hops won't notice!)   

Prior to the scientific revolution of the 1600's, Western Civ and thought still considered the Earth from a sacred (albeit pagan) perspective... as a form of the archetype: Mother. We knew better than to try to control Mother Earth; to force nature into artificial channels to serve our selfish needs... the silly ad from the '70s was silly only 'coz it was a universal truth that society had stopped believing in: It's not nice to fool Mother Nature. While the mother archetype is popularly understood as nurturing; life-giving; and creative - the same archetype contains the flip side; the yin to the yang of the tao... the threatening, dangerous and destructive forces are still part of the same mother archetype.

Well, Newton, et.al., thought all that was superstition and figured out ways to harness nature via technology to the "service" of mankind's interest in industrialization. This evolved into a belief that nature could be predicted and controlled.

Well, to my way of thinking, that's simply a societal delusion. Ever try to stop a trumpet vine (or any other pervasive weed) from spreading where you don't want it? You can cut it and poison it and no; it doesn't come back in that one place again - it comes up somewhere else; but damn if it doesn't come back up! Nature is NOT predictable or controllable. Think asteroids or how a tornado flattens one structure but leaves another.

So, I've finally gotten around to what this has to do with boundaries... LOL! (takes me awhile). All us humans have a primary relationship to the planet - whether we acknowledge it or not - and a relationship; any relationship; consists of boundaries - inviolable ones that each of us defend and maintain to support "SELF" -- AND -- the permeable, flexible, "open gates in the fence or wall" type of boundaries that permit us to be connected with others. We need both kinds of boundaries.

I do battle with weeds... and give miracle gro to my flowers. I don't win this battle, ever... because Mother Nature is way more powerful, unpredictable, and uncontrollable. But I know that, so it's not a problem. Some of the "weeds" even flower, so I try working with; not against them. I think: that in order to get to the nurturing side of "mother earth"... we have to acknowledge & accept & work WITH the idea that just like she gave us life... she can take us out, too. I respect that, as her boundary.

And I think the same is true of people and their boundaries. I don't ever win the battle over the negative... it just pops back up somewhere else. But I can nurture my nurturing friends until they finally crowd out and leave no room for the negative... you know?

Now that THAT'S out of my system.... how do all those different kinds of government deal with immigration? emigration? what are their economies like? are they self-contained & self-sufficient... or are they the kind of countries that have permanent UN and Red Cross contingents supporting them and preventing mass starvation and death? How do the types of boundaries, and the styles of maintaining them affect the well-being of the citizens?

Back to you, tt - I don't know if any of this helps, is anywhere in the vicinity of where you're going with your metaphors - or if it's distracting and a digression....

I'll try to drink less coffee, tomorrow...

[teartracks]

Hi Guest,

Well, thank you for giving this thread your overnight attention.  Any more thoughts on how thinking sovereignly is influencing your life?

tt

[teartracks]

Hi PR,

I'm going to 1, 2, 3, a, b, c, this, otherwise I'll end up writing something even more confusing!  

1)  For a month or so, I've lingered on the idea of how I get so used to looking at situations in the 'usual' way that I end up blinded to a better set of options/possibilities in decision making, personal boundary setting, personal border control, and personally understanding others more fully.   I think that is what brought me to examine at least some of life's situations in broader terms, i.e., egress, ingress, access, and behaviors that are still influenced by old history and the old saw, 'we've always done it that way.'  Ahhh, and bringing in the particle thing they concocted as a model for crowd control was to help me understand that humans DO make choices, different strokes for different folks, etc.  Someone with good boundaries might allow one person with a behavior to be in their loop while keeping another out for the same behavior for whatever reason.  That's part of complicated human behavior.  Human behavior can't always be, perhaps never can be predicted or explained by a systems mockup.  There is something peculiar and different in human makeup from all other forms of life on Earth.  Uhmm - maybe that's my quest.  To figure out what that peculiarity really is...Any ideas?

a)  "understanding others more fully".  I'm so grateful that I got free of the fear that had gripped me.  Now, I find the people I'm in relationship with endlessly fascinating and love it!    

2)   'the right to use and abuse a thing, within the limits of the law'.  Ancient Roman law.  I think the ancients might be delighted at how effectively this law has worked over millenia.  It has accomplished IMO everything they could possibly have dreamed, especially these last hundred years, including flourishing narcissism, a favorite topic of the board.  Same with this old law.  "sole and despotic dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in total exclusion of the right of any other individual in the universe.”  Edit in:  What I take from this  is that  dysfunction/narcissism/dependence/codependence is not necessarily handed down for a generation or two exclusively by parent/caregivers, but these may  be passed to us  by authority figures far in our past who influenced a culture's and its descendants.

3)  non-independent territories. 1) Disputed. 2) Occupied. 3) Government in exile. 4) Non-negligible independence movement.  
a)  Non-independent territories - This would have been me when I was in denial.  Dependent/codependent on or to the way I'd been taught.
b)  Disputed territory - That day when in a moment's time I saw the light and my emotional bottom fell out.  I began to dispute what I'd learned from FOO.
c)  Occupied territory - Those minutes, hours, days, years when all I could think about was my miserable existance and questioning whether it would ever change and what I was responsible for to make changes in my personal behavior.
d)  Government in exile - When I began to detach more and more from doing life the way I had before.  A form of NC?
e)  Non-negligible independence movement - Recovery, the state I will be in the rest of my life.  But I refuse to neglect practicing the things I've learned.  I WILL practice personal independence from old FOO ways for the rest of my life.  Unlike Guest, however, I'm unable to see myself as sovereign about much of anything.

PR, hang with me, I want to post back to your post.

tt

[teartracks]

Hi Guest,

Hi TT
well, yes I guess. I have a growing list of behaviours that I don't tolerate in others (closing my borders temporarily) and another list of my own behaviours that I'm curtailing (encroaching on foreign territory for example, giving hand-outs that haven't been requested).

I like visitors, tourists, people who invite me to their countries, fair trade etc.

Sounds like you're in a growth spurt.  That probably means you're taking in more information than you're giving out, kind of like an adolescent requires huge amounts of nourishment during a growth spurt.  I've heard that adolescents grow more while sleeping during growth spurts than while awake -  speaking of handouts and your thinking on this thread overnight  

tt

[sKePTiKal]

Thanks, tt! for your explanation. I can be such a free-association brainstorming thinker (sometimes!!), that it helps to have these more in-depth definitions for the purposes of discussion.

As to #1 - I can connect into that strongly. For months now, I've sort of been seeing the life I'm in - and all around me - in terms of boundaries. Like a lens filter, I guess. Seeing and FEELING; sensing... more than being able to think (verbalize) about it. I'm "thinking" about boundaries from an image of humans as amoebas...

some have more defined shapes - some are very fluid

when we come into contact with others, some of the cell boundaries of some people are more "hard"; less permeable; while some others are "soft" and open to a temporary joining in one or more points along the edge of those amoeba shapes

and commitment or love or healthy parent-child roles... come with or develop "permanent" connection points between the two cells (people) and MAYBE (going out on a limb here) this is how relationship scripts come into being. Using that illustration, I can sort of see the possibility of new scripts... through new "connection points", you know? That allows a relationship to grow and change over time.

The negative relationship pattern(s) sort of fits into this image-concept, too. Where one being-amoeba preys on others... or is deluded into thinking that having that sort of "permanent connection" to others actually increases it's own size or importance or whatever. It wants to "almost" destroy the other beings... but not quite... because then it would have to seek out new sources.

Thanks for linking the "disputed", "occupied", etc terms to your journey/path. Now, it's clearer how this applies to what you're thinking about. The Code of Hammurabi is something to check out, in addition to Roman law. I think it predates and probably influenced the development of Greek/Roman (even if they co-existed in the timeline) politico-social forms. I took 2 semesters of world history from the same fabulous prof... and then fused that with the art history I was learning simultaneously. But it wasn't until recently that a new category of study was "coined"... that was where my curiosity was leading me back then. It probably goes by various names, but I've heard it as "cultural archeology" - the study of social structures, forms, and it's effect on people. Sort of historical sociology, you know?

ANYWAY... all these words can be summed up in the fact that I agree with you about how historical "thought" at the socio-politico-cultural level (like cultural DNA) have a largely unseen (but traceable) effect on today's humans, relationships, society... how we judge what is good/bad, even what a "healthy" boundary looks like.

So lead on!! This is a fascinating topic.

[teartracks]

Hi PR,

when we come into contact with others, some of the cell boundaries of some people are more "hard"; less permeable; while some others are "soft" and open to a temporary joining in one or more points along the edge of those amoeba shapes

and commitment or love or healthy parent-child roles... come with or develop "permanent" connection points between the two cells (people) and MAYBE (going out on a limb here) this is how relationship scripts come into being. Using that illustration, I can sort of see the possibility of new scripts... through new "connection points", you know? That allows a relationship to grow and change over time.

The negative relationship pattern(s) sort of fits into this image-concept, too. Where one being-amoeba preys on others... or is deluded into thinking that having that sort of "permanent connection" to others actually increases it's own size or importance or whatever. It wants to "almost" destroy the other beings... but not quite... because then it would have to seek out new sources.

I get it!  In a human way, I'm living it.  Thanks for reading and applying your reason deductively to what I was trying to dope out!

tt

[Hopalong]

That was NoLongerASlave, CB...and I miss Lupita too!
Hope they'll both update us soon.

It's astute and sensitive of you to recognize that cultural differences have a huge impact on the LC/NC struggles.

TT, great book for you on this topic: The Silent Language.

I loved it years ago and my D is reading it now...

xo
Hops

[sKePTiKal]

I first actually felt this amoeba image through my tai chi push-hands class. (My T was actually a more advanced student in that class, too... and that was "Interesting"!!) Working through the physical contact with many partners, I became aware that different people felt differently - physically yes; but also their amoeba-boundary, too. And in my very first experience, my way-more-experienced partners were complaining that I "didn't play"... that was something I had to puzzle out. It meant a whole lot more than I didn't know what to do, physically. So I studied. I was the one in class, that when asked for feedback on a technique... I had to "come back" from way far away where I was trying to understand something that doesn't fit easily into words... because I was so intrigued with this whole new universe of "feeling" other people around me. Fortunately, it was more than OK to say "I don't know yet"!  Now, this class was a very controlled, safe, environment and I knew many of partners pretty well... it's not something that is easy to see in daily experiences.

That said, I try anyway! The reason for that, is personal. I have, for so long, understood "boundary" to mean some kind of invisible fortress, complete with moat & alligators or dragons that I'm one of those people who gets tagged "secretive, hard to get to know". I thought that a "healthy" boundary was going to involve a life-long commitment to keeping everyone and everything from making a connection with my amoeba-skin. And conversely - it was my obligation to other people and society - to keep myself well insulated WITHIN that boundary and not to venture out. The reason for this understanding, of course, is that relationship with Nmom - the "attachment style", to be specific. She insisted on being able to invade my amoeba-skin... and only saw the parts that she could (no matter how far-fetched or delusionary) tag or label or claim as "being just like her" - as if her whole life's existence depended on this... and that like the wicked witch of the west, would shrivel up and blow away, if I stopped letting her do this.

This of course, is absurdly rediculously insane. Part of me knew this, even at 12, 16, 18. And I started running away... putting many miles between us. But of course, the amoeba-skin is sort of in a unique time/space continuum or universe... and she could still violate that boundary with a phone call. At the same time, I was reducing the availability of resources to myself - with that "one way" understanding of boundaries... I simply didn't connect often with other people. I didn't trust them to not "invade" and pollute or claim my space... for themselves. Letting someone do that feels like how I imagine a zombie would feel... the walking dead, you know? A puppet... manipulated at long-distance by remote control programming.

Well, better late than never! I'm finally learning that "nothing bad will happen" if I trust other people and connect to - or let them connect to me - through that amoeba skin. The boundary is flexible, permeable... like skin... and has a language and consciousness of it's own... like a second invisible body, almost. And like the abstract way I thought about boundaries in the past... as a fortress to hide inside... I still have control of "immigration" and "emmigration".... but it's more fun, if I don't police that too intensely. I'm still safe from "invasion".

Gotta run....

[teartracks]

PR,

That said, I try anyway! The reason for that, is personal. I have, for so long, understood "boundary" to mean some kind of invisible fortress, complete with moat & alligators or dragons that I'm one of those people who gets tagged "secretive, hard to get to know". I thought that a "healthy" boundary was going to involve a life-long commitment to keeping everyone and everything from making a connection with my amoeba-skin. And conversely - it was my obligation to other people and society - to keep myself well insulated WITHIN that boundary and not to venture out. The reason for this understanding, of course, is that relationship with Nmom - the "attachment style", to be specific. She insisted on being able to invade my amoeba-skin... and only saw the parts that she could (no matter how far-fetched or delusionary) tag or label or claim as "being just like her" - as if her whole life's existence depended on this... and that like the wicked witch of the west, would shrivel up and blow away, if I stopped letting her do this.

This of course, is absurdly rediculously insane. Part of me knew this, even at 12, 16, 18. And I started running away... putting many miles between us. But of course, the amoeba-skin is sort of in a unique time/space continuum or universe... and she could still violate that boundary with a phone call. At the same time, I was reducing the availability of resources to myself - with that "one way" understanding of boundaries... I simply didn't connect often with other people. I didn't trust them to not "invade" and pollute or claim my space... for themselves. Letting someone do that feels like how I imagine a zombie would feel... the walking dead, you know? A puppet... manipulated at long-distance by remote control programming.

Well, better late than never! I'm finally learning that "nothing bad will happen" if I trust other people and connect to - or let them connect to me - through that amoeba skin. The boundary is flexible, permeable... like skin... and has a language and consciousness of it's own... like a second invisible body, almost. And like the abstract way I thought about boundaries in the past... as a fortress to hide inside... I still have control of "immigration" and "emmigration".... but it's more fun, if I don't police that too intensely. I'm still safe from "invasion".

I like the way you explained this, PR.  I'd begun to suspect that my perspective on boundaries (I think I had my boundaries in a box) feature THAT  had some black holes and what you and others have said confirm it.  Thanks for sharing.

tt
PS  Trying to get around to reading the Hammurabi Code...

[teartracks]

TT, great book for you on this topic: The Silent Language.

I loved it years ago and my D is reading it now...

xo
Hops

Hops, thanks for the book recommendation.  I read a brief blurb about it on the web and I really do want to read it.

tt